Buffalo County approves Kirschner administrative subdivision and two floodplain development agreements

The Buffalo County Board of Commissioners on June 10 approved an administrative subdivision for David C. and Judith I. Kirschner and authorized county signing of development restriction agreements supporting two Letter of Map Revision requests tied to fill-based floodplain changes.

The board adopted Resolution 2025-36 to approve the “Kirschner Administrative Subdivision,” finding the proposed plat met Buffalo County subdivision resolution requirements for the Agricultural zoning district. The minutes record the tract (Parcel 100194000) as containing approximately 304 remnant acres. The subdivision hearing included licensed land surveyor Chad Dixon and property owner David C. Kirschner, and no members of the public spoke in opposition.

Separately, the board reviewed Building Restriction Agreements associated with two LOMR-F applications and approved Resolutions 2025-37 and 2025-38 allowing the county to enter Development Restriction Agreements. Surveyor Mitchell Humphrey presented engineering materials for both properties. One property described in Resolution 2025-37 (also referred to as 310 S Hwy 10) was certified by an engineer as meeting local standards for structures and fill for FEMA consideration and the resolution authorizes the chairperson to execute the agreement. Resolution 2025-38 covers accretion land and portions of Government Lots 9 and 10 (property also identified as 45345 Kilgore Rd) and similarly authorizes execution of the county’s Development Restriction Agreement after finding the applicant’s certifications meet local regulatory requirements.

The board’s actions reflect local floodplain policy and the procedural step of documenting development restrictions that typically accompany FEMA LOMR-F review. No costs, bond conditions, or amended tax implications were recorded in the minutes; technical descriptions and legal land descriptions are included in the adopted resolutions and are on file with the County Clerk.

All three measures passed by roll-call votes with the same seven commissioners recorded as voting “Aye.” The resolutions and supporting documents (including engineer certifications and legal descriptions) were filed with the County Clerk’s office.